getgrizzy said:That would fit the 'being very liberal with their ratings' point that I made.AZGrizFan said:getgrizzy said:We've had lots of recruiting classes that look as good as this one. This one has a lot of star-rated players, but we should all know by now that star ratings aren't very accurate. I'd even go so far as to say that if you're a 3-star player and you end up at a FCS school, the people doing the rating are simply wrong, being very liberal with their ratings, or you have baggage (grades, trouble, injuries). No way should a true 3-star player start his career in the FCS.
Really? The state of Texas ALONE produces roughly 1,300 3, 4 and 5 star football players each graduating class. Each year roughly 350 of those sign with FBS schools. That leaves a LOT of star-rated players looking for homes. And if star ratings aren't very accurate, how come Alabama has so many 5 star and 4 star players on their team, and lead all of college football with players in the NFL?
Star ratings might be wrong (or missing) on athletes from some of the less densely populated areas, but I'm pretty sure the rating agencies are fairly accurate in the more populated states like California, Texas, Arizona, Pennsylvania, etc., etc.
This article is a bit dated, but read it and then tell me star rating isn't accurate:
http://athlonsports.com/nfl/nfl-draft-do-recruiting-rankings-matter
Interesting that your article says there are 1,150 players in the nation with 3-4-5 star ratings. Yet you say that there are 1,300 in Texas alone.
Read the article again. It says there are 1,150 players signed by FBS Schools with 3-4-5 star ratings.
Using a 3,000-player pool for any given year (25 scholarships x 124 FBS teams = 3,100 prospects), here is how an average recruiting class looks: Five-Stars: 25-30 per year Four-Stars: 275-325 per year Three-Stars: 700-800 per year Two-Stars: 1,600-1,800 per year.
That absolutely backs up my point that many go overlooked/unsigned by FBS schools.